Cited by 27Information Retrieval and Search BehaviorTopic ModelingRecommender Systems and Techniques

Learning to Rank in Generative Retrieval

Open access
Li, Yongqi, Yang, Nan, Wang, Liang, Wei, Furu, Li, Wenjie·2024·Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

Generative retrieval stands out as a promising new paradigm in text retrieval that aims to generate identifier strings of relevant passages as the retrieval target. This generative paradigm taps into powerful generative language models, distinct from traditional sparse or dense retrieval methods. However, only learning to generate is insufficient for generative retrieval. Generative retrieval learns to generate identifiers of relevant passages as an intermediate goal and then converts predicted identifiers into the final passage rank list. The disconnect between the learning objective of autoregressive models and the desired passage ranking target leads to a learning gap. To bridge this gap, we propose a learning-to-rank framework for generative retrieval, dubbed LTRGR. LTRGR enables generative retrieval to learn to rank passages directly, optimizing the autoregressive model toward the final passage ranking target via a rank loss. This framework only requires an additional learning-to-rank training phase to enhance current generative retrieval systems and does not add any burden to the inference stage. We conducted experiments on three public benchmarks, and the results demonstrate that LTRGR achieves state-of-the-art performance among generative retrieval methods. The code and checkpoints are released at https://github.com/liyongqi67/LTRGR.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1609/aaai.v38i8.28717

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [3]3. Cao, Z.; Qin, T.; Liu, T.-Y.; Tsai, M.-F.; and Li, H. 2007. Learning to rank: from pairwise approach to listwise ap- proach. In Proceedings of the 24th international conference on Machine learning, 129-136.
  2. [6]6. Crammer, K.; and Singer, Y. 2001. Pranking with ranking. Advances in neural information processing systems, 14.
  3. [12]12. ACL.
  4. [20]20. ACL.
  5. [27]27. Xia, F.; Liu, T.-Y.; Wang, J.; Zhang, W.; and Li, H. 2008. List- wise approach to learning to rank: theory and algorithm. In Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Machine learning, 1192-1199.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, Y., Yang, N., Wang, L., Wei, F., & Li, W.
Affiliations
  • Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HK)
  • Microsoft (United States) (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Published
2024-03-24
Volume
38
Issue
8
Pages
8716-8723
ISSN
  • 2159-5399 (ISSN-L)
  • 2374-3468
OpenAlex
W4393153307
Cited by
27
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1
FWCI
9.90
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • AAAI Publications (The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI)) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (62076212)
  • Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
Keywords
generative retrieval, learning to rank, passage ranking, rank loss, autoregressive language models, text retrieval

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review